Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Septic shock, defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection, is a highly lethal condition that causes substantial morbidity and mortality among critically ill patients. One of the hallmarks of sepsis is the excessive release of cytokines and other inflammatory mediators causing refractory hypotension, tissue damage, metabolic acidosis and ultimately multiple organ failure. In this context, cytokine reduction by hemoadsorption represents a new concept for blood purification, developed to attenuate the overwhelming systemic levels of pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory mediators released in the early phase of sepsis. Methods In the present case series, we evaluated the impact of a new hemoadsorption device (CytoSorb) used as adjunctive therapy, on hemodynamics and clinically relevant outcome parameters in 26 critically ill patients with septic shock and in need of renal replacement therapy. Results We found that treatment of these patients with septic shock was associated with hemodynamic stabilization and a reduction in blood lactate levels. Actual mortality in the overall patient population was lower than mortality predicted by acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II). These effects seem to be more pronounced in patients in whom therapy started within 24 h of sepsis diagnosis, whereas a delay in the start of therapy was associated with a poor response to therapy in terms of reduction of catecholamine demand and survival. Moreover, from our patient population, medical patients seemed to benefit more than post-surgical patients in terms of survival. Treatment using the CytoSorb device was safe and well-tolerated with no device-related adverse events during or after the treatment sessions. Conclusion Hemoadsorption using CytoSorb resulted in rapid hemodynamic stabilization and increased survival, particularly in patients in whom therapy was started early. Given the positive clinical experience of this case series, randomized controlled trials are urgently needed to define the potential benefits of this new treatment option.

To compare ICU-free (ICU-FD) and ventilator-free days (VFD) in the 30 days after randomization in patients that received isoflurane or propofol without receiving the other sedative. A recent randomized controlled trial (RCT) compared inhaled isoflurane via the Sedaconda® anaesthetic conserving device (ACD) with intravenous propofol for up to 54 h (Meiser et al. 2021). After end of study treatment, continued sedation was locally determined. Patients were eligible for this post-hoc analysis only if they had available 30-day follow-up data and never converted to the other drug in the 30 days from randomization. Data on ventilator use, ICU stay, concomitant sedative use, renal replacement therapy (RRT) and mortality were collected. Sixty-nine of 150 patients randomized to isoflurane and 109 of 151 patients randomized to propofol were eligible. After adjusting for potential confounders, the isoflurane group had more ICU-FD than the propofol group (17.3 vs 13.8 days, p = 0.028). VFD for the isoflurane and propofol groups were 19.8 and 18.5 respectively (p = 0.454). Other sedatives were used more frequently (p < 0.0001) and RRT started in a greater proportion of patients in the propofol group (p = 0.011). Isoflurane via the ACD was not associated with more VFD but with more ICU-FD and less concomitant sedative use. •Sedation practice in Intensive Care Medicine.•Inhaled sedation Intensive Care Medicine.•ICU-free days.•Ventilator-free days.

Background. Recent population-based cohort studies have questioned the role of pneumococci as the most frequent pathogen causing severe infection in patients after splenectomy. The aim of the study was to define the causative pathogens and clinical presentation of patients with overwhelming postsplenectomy infection (OPSI). Methods. In a prospective cohort study in 173 German intensive care units, we searched for patients with and without asplenia and community-acquired severe sepsis/septic shock. Clinical and laboratory variables and survival of patients were assessed. Results. Fifty-two patients with severe sepsis or septic shock with asplenia and 52 without asplenia were included. OPSI patients more often had a history of malignancy (38% vs 17%; P= 0.16) and had a lower body mass index (24 kg/m2 vs 28 kg/m2; P= .004). Streptococcus pneumoniae was detected more frequently in OPSI patients (42% vs 12% without asplenia; P< .001) and more frequently manifested as bloodstream infection (31% vs 6%; P= .002). Gram-negative infection was similar in both groups (12% vs 19%; P = .157). Pneumococcal vaccine coverage of OPSI patients was low overall (42% vs 8% among patients without asplenia; P < .001). Purpura fulminans was a frequent complication, developing in 19% of OPSI patients vs 5% of patients without asplenia (P = .038). The interval between splenectomy and OPSI was 6 years (range, 1 month-50 years). On multivariable Poisson regression, asplenia was the only predictive variable independently associated with pneumococcal sepsis (adjusted relative risk, 2.53 [95% confidence interval, 1.06-6.08]). Conclusions. Pneumococcal infections remain the most important cause of severe sepsis and septic shock following splenectomy.

PurposeThe question of whether cancer patients with severe respiratory failure benefit from veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv-ECMO) remains unanswered. We, therefore, analyzed clinical characteristics and outcomes of a large cohort of cancer patients treated with vv-ECMO with the aim to identify prognostic factors.Methods297 cancer patients from 19 German and Austrian hospitals who underwent vv-ECMO between 2009 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. A multivariable cox proportional hazards analysis for overall survival was performed. In addition, a propensity score-matched analysis and a latent class analysis were conducted.ResultsPatients had a median age of 56 (IQR 44–65) years and 214 (72%) were males. 159 (54%) had a solid tumor and 138 (47%) a hematologic malignancy. The 60-day overall survival rate was 26.8% (95% CI 22.1–32.4%). Low platelet count (HR 0.997, 95% CI 0.996–0.999; p = 0.0001 per 1000 platelets/µl), elevated lactate levels (HR 1.048, 95% CI 1.012–1.084; p = 0.0077), and disease status (progressive disease [HR 1.871, 95% CI 1.081–3.238; p = 0.0253], newly diagnosed [HR 1.571, 95% CI 1.044–2.364; p = 0.0304]) were independent adverse prognostic factors for overall survival. A propensity score-matched analysis with patients who did not receive ECMO treatment showed no significant survival advantage for treatment with ECMO.ConclusionThe overall survival of cancer patients who require vv-ECMO is poor. This study shows that the value of vv-ECMO in cancer patients with respiratory failure is still unclear and further research is needed. The risk factors identified in the present analysis may help to better select patients who may benefit from vv-ECMO.

IntroductionSepsis and septic shock have mortality rates between 20% and 50%. In sepsis, the immune response becomes dysregulated, which leads to an imbalance between proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory mediators. When standard therapeutic measures fail to improve patients’ condition, additional therapeutic alternatives are applied to reduce morbidity and mortality. One of the most recent alternatives is extracorporeal cytokine adsorption with a device called CytoSorb. This study aims to compare the efficacy of standard medical therapy and continuous extracorporeal cytokine removal with CytoSorb therapy in patients with early refractory septic shock. Furthermore, we compare the dosing of CytoSorb adsorber device changed every 12 or 24 hours.Methods and analysisIt is a prospective, randomised, controlled, open-label, international, multicentre, phase III study. Patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria will be randomly assigned to receive standard medical therapy (group A) or—in addition to standard treatment—CytoSorb therapy. CytoSorb treatment will be continuous and last for at least 24 hours, CytoSorb adsorber device will be changed every 12 (group B) or 24 hours (group C). Our primary outcome is shock reversal (no further need or a reduced (≤10% of the maximum dose) vasopressor requirement for 3 hours) and time to shock reversal (number of hours elapsed from the start of the treatment to shock reversal).Based on sample size calculation, 135 patients (1:1:1) will need to be enrolled in the study. A predefined interim analysis will be performed after reaching 50% of the planned sample size, therefore, the corrected level of significance (p value) will be 0.0294.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the Scientific and Research Ethics Committee of the Hungarian Medical Research Council (OGYÉI/65049/2020). Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNCT04742764; Pre-results.

A dysregulated host response is a common feature in critically ill patients due to both infectious and non-infectious origins that can lead to life-threatening organ dysfunction, which is still the primary cause of death in intensive care units worldwide. In its course, pathologic, unregulated levels of inflammatory mediators are often released into the circulation, a phenomenon also referred to as a “cytokine storm”. To date, there are no approved therapies to modulate the excessive immune response and limit hyperinflammation with the goal of preventing related organ failure and death. In this context, extracorporeal blood purification therapies aiming at the alteration of the host inflammatory response through broad-spectrum, non-selective removal of inflammatory mediators have come into focus. A novel hemoadsorption device (CytoSorb®, CytoSorbents Inc., Princeton, NJ, USA) has shown promising results in patients with hyperinflammation from various origins. Although a significant body of literature exists, there is ongoing research to address many important remaining questions, including the optimal selection of patient groups who might benefit the most, optimal timing for therapy initiation, optimal schedule for adsorber exchanges and therapy duration, as well as an investigation into the potential removal of concomitant antibiotics and other medications. In this review, we discuss the existing evidence and provide a consensus-based best practice guidance for CytoSorb® hemoadsorption therapy in patients with vasoplegic shock.

PurposeTo investigate whether (1 → 3)-β-d-Glucan (BDG)-guidance shortens time to antifungal therapy and thereby reduces mortality of sepsis patients with high risk of invasive Candida infection (ICI).MethodsMulticenter, randomized, controlled trial carried out between September 2016 and September 2019 in 18 intensive care units enrolling adult sepsis patients at high risk for ICI. Patients in the control group received targeted antifungal therapy driven by culture results. In addition to targeted therapy, patients in the BDG group received antifungals if at least one of two consecutive BDG samples taken during the first two study days was ≥ 80 pg/mL. Empirical antifungal therapy was discouraged in both groups. The primary endpoint was 28-day-mortality.Results339 patients were enrolled. ICI was diagnosed in 48 patients (14.2%) within the first 96 h after enrollment. In the BDG-group, 48.8% (84/172) patients received antifungals during the first 96 h after enrollment and 6% (10/167) patients in the control group. Death until day 28 occurred in 58 of 172 patients (33.7%) in the BDG group and 51 of 167 patients (30.5%) in the control group (relative risk 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 0.80–1.51; p = 0.53). Median time to antifungal therapy was 1.1 [interquartile range (IQR) 1.0–2.2] days in the BDG group and 4.4 (IQR 2.0–9.1, p < 0.01) days in the control group.ConclusionsSerum BDG guided antifungal treatment did not improve 28-day mortality among sepsis patients with risk factors for but unexpected low rate of IC. This study cannot comment on the potential benefit of BDG-guidance in a more selected at-risk population.

Introduction: Despite advances in critical care medicine, adjunctive approaches in sepsis therapy have failed to prove their efficacy. Notwithstanding promising results using hemoadsorption (CytoSorb), questions remain concerning timing and dosing. We created a dynamic scoring system (DSS) to assess patients with early septic shock and performed a first evaluation of the system in this patient population. Methods: Data from 502 patients with septic shock according to Sepsis-3 criteria were retrospectively analyzed. Score parameters were documented at the time of diagnosis (T0) and 6 h later (T6) to calculate a dynamic score. Survival on day 7 and 56 as well as ICU and hospital mortality were analyzed in regard to the score as well as the delay of hemoadsorption therapy. Results: Of the 502 patients analyzed, 198 received adjunctive CytoSorb treatment and 304 received standard therapy. Septic shock was typically represented by 5 points, while >6 points indicated a situation refractory to standard therapy with the worst outcome in patients shown by >8 points. The differences in mortality between the score groups (<6, 6–8, >8 points) were significant. Analysis further showed a significant 56-day, ICU and hospital survival advantage in CytoSorb patients when therapy was started early. Conclusion: We created a scoring system allowing for the assessment of the clinical development of patients in the early phase of septic shock. Applying this approach, we were able to detect populations with a distinct mortality pattern. The data also showed that an early start of CytoSorb therapy was associated with significantly improved survival. As a next step, this easy-to-apply scoring system would require validation in a prospective manner to learn whether patients to be treated with hemoadsorption therapy in the course of septic shock could thereby be identified.

Recent in vitro studies have investigated the effects of hemoadsorption therapy on endothelial function in sepsis showing a reduction in markers of endothelial dysfunction, but, to this day, there are no clinical studies proving whether this approach could actually positively influence the disturbed vascular barrier function in septic conditions. We retrospectively analyzed data on administered fluid volumes and catecholamines in 124 septic shock patients. We collected catecholamine and volume requirements and calculated the volume balance within different time periods to obtain an assumption on the stability of the vascular barrier. Regarding the entire study cohort, our findings revealed a significant reduction in fluid balance at 72 h (T72) compared to both baseline (T0) and the 24 h mark (T24). Fluid balances from T72–T0 were significantly lower in hospital survivors compared with non-survivors. Patients who received a second catecholamine had a significantly lower in-hospital mortality. Our findings suggest that the applied treatment regimen including hemoadsorption therapy is associated with a reduced positive fluid balance paralleled by reductions in vasopressor needs, suggesting a potential positive effect on endothelial integrity. These results, derived from a large cohort of patients, provide valuable insights on the multiple effects of hemoadsorption treatment in septic shock patients.

Background: Our aim is to report the results of the ‘liver indication’ subset of patients in the CytoSorb International Registry. Methods: Structured data were recorded. Treatment characteristics and changes from T1 (start of hemoadsorption) to T2 (termination) were evaluated with a special focus on bilirubin, C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, interleukin-6, platelet levels, SOFA scores, mortality, and subjective assessment by the attending physicians. Results: Until January 2021, from the total 1434 patients, 109 (age: 49.2 ± 17.1 years, 57.8% males) received treatment for hyperbilirubinemia. APACHE II-predicted mortality was 49.6 ± 26.8%. In the study, 91% of patients were alive at the termination of hemoadsorption and improvement was observed by the physicians in 75 cases. Overall, 65 (59.6%) patients died in the hospital, and 60 (55.0%) died in the ICU. Patients received a median of two treatments for a median of 43 h (interquartile range: 24–72 h) in total. Serum bilirubin levels reduced significantly to −4.6 (95% CI: −6.329 to −2.8) mg/dL. Thrombocytopenia was reported in four patients as an adverse event. Conclusions: We report the largest case series on hemoadsorption for ‘liver indication’ from the CytoSorb International Registry. The finding of significant bilirubin removal observed in our study could have substantial impact in designing and executing further studies on the effects of hemoadsorption in liver dysfunction, which are certainly warranted.